•■■4 
 
 m 
 
 F.D. Hemenway 
 
 Biblical Introduction /Sr^" 
 
 x!^:^ 
 
 :^J -■-" 
 

 
Y^ 
 
 a:;; 
 
 V 
 
 r- 
 
 1^ 
 
 m'' 191; 
 
 Biblical IntFoduetion. 
 
 SYLLABUS. 
 
 F. D. HEMENWAY, D. D, 
 
 Copyrig:ht 1884, by F. D. Hkmenway, D. D. 
 
.H46 
 
BIBLICAL INTRODUCTION. 
 
 Syllabus of Lectures 
 
 BY 
 
 F. D. HEMEISrWAY, D. D., 
 
 Professor of IB^regretica,! 'X'l3.eologr37', 
 
 IN THE 
 
 Garrett Biblical Institute. 
 
 EVANSTON, ILL. 
 
 NOV 27 19 
 
 CO f'-s-tsics-xxt'e: ID . 
 
 
 CHICAGO: 
 
 W P. Dunn & Co., Printers, 57 Washington Street, 
 
 1884. 
 
d 
 
PRELIMINARY. 
 
 I. 
 
 General View. 
 
 1. Definition : 
 
 Biblical introduction is that branch of theological science 
 which is occupied with the records of sacred Scripture. 
 
 2. Its Province. 
 
 It proposes to lead us into the scientific and fruitful 
 study of the Bible. As a means to this result it seeks 
 to furnish all necessary preliminary information. 
 (1). As to the Bible itself. 
 
 (a). The origin of its several parts. Who wrote these 
 
 books? When? Where? For what purpose? 
 
 ip). Their organization into a Canon. When? By 
 
 whom? By what standard? 
 (c). The subject matter. 
 
 (a). As to form; — history, poetry, prophecy, etc. 
 {b). As to substance. What truths? 
 (d). Its claims and character. 
 
 (e). Its general history. The means of its preser- 
 vation; its spread; its position and influence. 
 (2). As to the best facilities for its study. 
 (3.) As to the qualifications needed for this study. 
 {a). Good general scholarship. 
 {b). Spiritual earnestness, 
 (c). Teachableness. 
 
 (d). Breadth of intellectual sympathy. 
 (e). Faith, or spiritual receptivity. 
 
4 Syllabus of Lectures. 
 
 3. Organization of the Subject. 
 
 It treats of the origin, preservation and interpretation 
 of the Bible. 
 (1). Its origin. 
 
 {a). Its human origin. 
 
 (a). As to individual books. 
 [b). Their organization into a canon. 
 [b). Its divine origin. 
 {a). The fact. 
 \b). The mode. 
 (2). Its preservation. 
 
 [a). The manner or means of its preservation. 
 {b). The result — Has it been preserved with substan- 
 tial accuracy? 
 (3). Its interpretation. 
 
 (a). The history of interpretation. 
 
 {b). Principles and laws of interpretation. 
 
 (c). Helps and accessories in interpretation. 
 
 11. 
 
 Claims of the Bible. 
 
 These are based upon — 
 1. Its Antiquity. 
 
 The oldest Biblical books date about 1500 B. C; the 
 youngest about 100 A. D. And these earliest books are 
 historical and so look back to an antiquity much beyond 
 themselves. Besides they contain fragments of more 
 ancient literature. An example of this is the Song of 
 Lamech, in the fourth chapter of Genesis. 
 
 But this antiquity can be best judged of by comparison: 
 (1). With Greek literature. Here Homer is the old- 
 est author, and his date is from 800 to 1000 B. C. 
 The best known Attic writers, such as Plato, Xen- 
 ophon, Demosthenes, etc., were contemporaneous 
 
Syllabus of Lecturen. 
 
 with the latest Old Testament writers. Herodo- 
 tus, "the father of history," is more than a thou- 
 sand years younger than Moses. 
 
 (2). With Latin literature. The best known and most 
 influential writers in the Latin language, Caesar, 
 Cicero, Virgil, Horace, Livy, and Tacitus lived near 
 the time of Christ. 
 
 (3). With Hindoo literature. Here the Vedas are the 
 most ancient. They are 1,028 in number, and as 
 early as 600 B. C. their verses, words and syllables 
 had been carefully enumerated. Max Muller esti- 
 mates that " as far as our knowledge goes at pres- 
 ent we are perfectly justified in referring them to 
 the tenth or twelfth centui-y before our era." — 
 Cont. Review, A2)ril, 1870. 
 
 (4). With Chinese literature. The third book of the 
 Chinese Classics, called the Book of Odes, is 
 regarded as most ancient. No absolute date can 
 be given for it, but the most competent judges 
 believe that it probably goes back fully 1000 years 
 B. C. It seems to stand in the same general rank 
 with the Vedas and the Davidic Psalms. 
 
 2. Its History. 
 
 (1). It has held a central place in literature. 
 (a). It has increased its quantity. 
 
 {a). By multiplying copies of itself. Fully 150,000,- 
 000 Bibles now in existence — one for every 
 ten of the earth's inhabitants. 
 {b). Other books directly created: More than 60,- 
 000 commentaries. Fully 150,000 Christian 
 hymns. Copies of some of these have been 
 multiplied literally by the million, 
 (c). Still others indirectly produced. 
 {b). It has improved its quality. The great master- 
 pieces of modern literature were evidently 
 
6 Syllabus of Lectures. 
 
 born of the Bible. Dante, Milton and Shakes- 
 speare will serve as illustrations of this. 
 
 (2). It has stood in the center of the highest civiliza- 
 tion. Of this there are two tests or standards, 
 namely, the family and the individual man. That 
 civilization is best which gives the best homes and 
 the noblest characters. 
 
 (3). It is associated with the best philosophy, 
 
 (4). And with the most beneficent and most spiritual 
 religion . 
 3. Its Contents. 
 
 (1). Their literary excellence. 
 
 (2). The dignity of the themes. 
 
 (3). Their relation to human interest. 
 
 (4). Their manifest divinity. The Bible claims to be 
 the Book of God. If this claim is made good 
 everything is involved in it. 
 
 III. 
 Editorial Changes, Modifications and Additions. 
 
 i. As to the Text. 
 
 {a). Hebrew vowel points and accents — 6th to 10th 
 
 centuries. 
 [b). Greek breathings and accents — 7th and 8th cen- 
 turies, 
 (c). Greek punctuation — complete in 10th century. 
 (d). Word- separation — 5th century. 
 2. B(/ Way of Ari'angement. 
 
 (1). Of the Old Testament Books. 
 
 {a). Originally in three divisions — Law., Prophets., 
 Writings. Traces of this three-fold division are 
 found in the Apochrypha, Philo., Josephus, and 
 the New Testament (Luke 24:44), and it is pre- 
 served in the ordinary copies of the Hebrew ss. 
 
Syllabus of Lectures. 
 
 (6). Josephus, in his epistle against Apion, mentions 
 five books of the X^m/j, thirteen of the Prophets., 
 and four of the Writings. These last were Psa., 
 Prov., Eccl. and Cant. 
 
 (c). In the common, known also as the Masoretic plan 
 of division, the following books also stand in this 
 third division — Ruth, Chron., Ezra, Neh., Esther, 
 Job, Lam. and Dan. This plan of division then 
 is as follow^s: 
 
 Law 
 
 f Gen. 
 I Ex. 
 { Lev. 
 I Num. 
 l^ Deut. 
 
 Former. 
 
 ProDliets. \ 
 
 I 
 
 I Later. 
 
 I 
 
 Josh. 
 
 Judg. 
 
 Sam. 
 
 [ Kings. 
 
 Greater. 
 
 Lesser. 
 
 I 
 
 Isa. 
 
 Jer. 
 
 Ezek. 
 
 Hose a. 
 
 Joel. 
 
 "] Amos. 
 
 [ Obad. 
 
 j; 
 
 Jonah. Zeph. 
 
 Micah. Haggai. 
 
 Hab. Zach. 
 
 Nah. Malachi 
 
 Writings.— Ruth, Chron., Ezra, Neh., Esther, Job, Psa., Prov., 
 Eccl., Cant., Lam. and Dan. 
 
 {cT). The Septuagint obliterates the distinction be- 
 tween the Prophets and the Writings, inter- 
 sperses the Apochryphal books, and places the 
 Lesser Prophets before the Greater. 
 
 (e). In the Vulgate the same order is preserved 
 except that the Greater Prophets are again made 
 to precede the Lesser. 
 
 (/). The English Version follows the same order 
 but omits the Apochryphal books. 
 
Syllables of Lectures. 
 
 (2). Of the New Testament Books. 
 
 (a). The Gospels and Acts usually come first and in 
 their present order. This probably indicates the 
 relative age of the Gospels. 
 
 {h). Following Acts the Eastern Church placed first the 
 Catholic epistles, then the Pauline^ the Western 
 Church placed first thePauline then the Catholic. 
 
 (c). Of the Pauline epistles both divisions of the 
 church agreed in placing first those addressed (in 
 the order of their importance) to churches; then 
 those addressed to individuals. The notable dif- 
 ference, however, was as to the book of Hebrews^ 
 which, in the lists of the Eastern Church follows 
 Thessalonians, but in those of the Western Church 
 Philemon. This probably indicates doubt as to 
 its Pauline origin in the Western Church. 
 
 {d). The Apocalypse has always stood last. This is 
 in harmony with its contents, and it was last 
 admitted into the canon. 
 
 3. By Way of Addition. 
 
 (1). Superscriptions, or Titles, 
 (a). Of Books. 
 
 For the most part these must be set down as of 
 editorial origin. Those of the Pentateuch cer- 
 tainly originated as late as 285 B. C. Those of 
 the Gospels took their present form in the 2d 
 century. 
 {b). Of Psalms. 
 
 These are certainly older than the Septuagint, 
 and may be original. 
 (2). Subscriptions of Paul's epistles. Originated in 5th 
 century. 
 
 4. By Way of Division. 
 
 (1) Paragraphs. 
 
Syllabus of Lectures. 9 
 
 {a). Ammonian sections of the Gos[)els — 3d century. 
 
 (/>). Eusebian canons — 4th century. 
 
 (c). Parshioth or Paragraphs of t}ie Pentateuch. 
 
 The 54 Greater P. originated as early as the 3d 
 century A. D., the G09 Lesser P. originated 
 somewhat earlier. 
 {d). The Haphtaroth of the Prophets may have been 
 equally early. 
 (2). Chapters. 
 
 The present chapter-division made by Cardinal 
 Hugo, A. D. 1248. 
 (3). Verses. 
 
 {a). Of the Old Testament made by the Masoretes 
 
 from 600 to 900 A. D. 
 (h). Of New Testament made by Robert Stephens. 
 First used in 1551. 
 
 ORIGIN. 
 
 IV. 
 
 Original Languages op Scripture. 
 A. Of the Old Testament. 
 1. Names. 
 
 Jews' language — Isa. 36: 11,13; Neh. 
 
 (1). Biblical \ 13: 24. 
 
 Language of Canaan — Isa. 19: 18. 
 
 (2). Extra-Biblical — Hebrew. (In the New Testament 
 
 this term is applied to the Aramaean). 
 Classification. — An Oriental language of the Shem- 
 itic family. The three great divisions of this family 
 
10 Syllabus of Lectures. 
 
 (1). The Armaean. 
 
 Two dialects — the Chaldean and the Syriac — 
 spoken mainly to the north and east of Palestine. 
 The literature of the Chaldee is: 
 
 (a). Certain fragments of the canonical books — Dan. 
 2: 14—7: 28. Ez. 4: 8-16; 7:12-26. 
 
 if)). The Targums. 
 
 (c). The Talmud. 
 
 {d). The Masora. 
 (2). The Hebrew. 
 
 Spoken only in Palestine. Literature limited to the 
 
 Old Testament. 
 (3). The Arabic. 
 
 Spoken to the South and east of Palestine. Since 
 
 widely diflfused. Abundant literature. 
 
 3. Relative antiquity of the Hebrew. 
 
 («). The mother-speech of man cannot be identified 
 
 with any extant language. 
 (6). But the Hebrew is entitled to special respect on 
 the score of antiquity. 
 {a). Its literature is old. 
 (5). Alphabetic writing originated here. 
 (c). Most direct line of development from the prim- 
 itive and normal life of man. 
 
 4. Characteristics. 
 
 (c/). Exclusively consonantal roots. 
 (^). Shades of meaning by vowels, 
 (c). Marked grammatical peculiarities: — 
 
 {a). No case-endings. 
 
 {f>). Only two genders — those of life. 
 
 (c). Two tenses — past and future. 
 
 (c^). Genitive and accusative pronouns suffixed. 
 
 5. Apparatus for its study. 
 
 {ci). Lexicons — Gesenius, Fuersts, Davies. 
 (6). Grammars — Gesenius, Ewald, Green, etc. 
 (c). Concordances, Fuersts, Eng., Heb. Con., etc. 
 
Syllabus of Lectures. 11 
 
 B. Of the New Testament. 
 
 1. Name — Hellenistic Greek. 
 
 This means Hebraistic Greek. This dialect of the 
 Greek is found in ths Septuagint, Josephus, and the 
 the New Testament. 
 
 2. Character. Three elements: — 
 
 {a). The Greek element. This is in the form of the 
 
 common dialect. 
 {b). The Hebrew element. This modifies the Greek 
 so as to cause some peculiarities: — 
 (a). As to expression — vividness. 
 
 Pregnant metaphors as " edify," prepositions 
 as well as case-endings, etc., etc. 
 ip). As to construction — simplicity. 
 
 There are few participles and the sentences 
 are co-ordinate, 
 (c). The Christian element. 
 
 This consists largely in the new meanings 
 given to words. 
 
 3. Apparatus for its study. 
 
 {a.) Lexicons — Robinson, Cremar. 
 {b). Grammars — Winer, Buttman. 
 (c.) Concordances — Bruder's, Schmidt, Hudson, Eng- 
 lishman's. 
 
 V. 
 
 Origin of Individual Books. 
 
 (The vital germ of the Old Testament is in the Penta- 
 teuch; of the New Testament, in the Gospels. In treat- 
 ing, then, of the origin of the books, it will best serve 
 the purpose of this course of lectures to limit our inquiry 
 to these two divisions.) 
 A. The Pentateuch. 
 I. General view. 
 1. Names. 
 
12 Syllabus of Lectures. 
 
 (1). In the Bible itself. 
 
 " Book of the Law of God "— " of Jehovah "— " of 
 Moses ", etc., etc. 
 (2). Among the Jews. " The Five-Fifths of the 
 Law." Each book called by first important word. 
 (3). Among the Christians. " Pentateuch " origin- 
 ated with the early Greek Fathers. 
 The present names of the books are of comparatively 
 late origin — as late as 285 B. C. 
 
 2. Forms. Havernick and others regard the present 
 five-fold form as editorial; Keil and Bleek think it 
 original. This is the true view. 
 
 3. Plan. (Lange.) 
 
 Genesis — Preparation for the Theocracy. 
 Exodus — Founding of the Theocracy. 
 Leviticus — Legislation for the Theocracy. 
 Numbers — Later history and legislation. 
 Deuteronomy — Supplementary and final. 
 II. Its origin and authorship. 
 
 Is it a genuine product of the period of the Exodus 
 and was Moses its author? If so, of course editorial addi- 
 tions and modifications must be admitted. 
 1. Affirmative. 
 
 (1). This the unanimous belief of the Jews them- 
 selves. No trace of doubt until the 11th century. 
 (2). And of Christians. Most of the questionings 
 
 have arisen within the last 100 years. 
 (3.) Some ancient heathen testimonies. (See Rawlin- 
 
 son's "Historical Evidences.") 
 (4). For certain most important passages Mosaic 
 authorship is claimed. 
 Ex. 17:14, 24-47; Num. 33:2. 
 Deut. 31: 9-11, 24-26, j Deut. 29: 19, 20, 27. 
 compare with ( Deut. 17:18, 19. 
 
 (5). This the testimony of the later Scriptural books. 
 {a). By using the name of Moses with the Law. 
 
Syllabus of Lectures. 13 
 
 {b). By implicating the time of Moses as the 
 
 period of its origin, 
 (c). By assuming an acquaintance with the things 
 which the Pentateuch contains. 
 (6). Much corroborative internal evidence. 
 {a). Its grand archaic character. 
 
 {a). Shown to some extent even in the language. 
 (b). And especially in the subject matter. 
 (6). The author was acquainted with Egypt, Gen. 
 40:16,40:11,41:14, 44:5, 50:^3, 26; Ex. 
 2:3; Deut. 10:10, 11. 
 (c). And with the Sinaitic peninsula. 
 {d). He was a Hebrew. 
 (e). He was familiar with shepherd life. 
 (/'.) The whole falls into perfect unity. 
 2. Difficulties and objections. 
 
 (1). " Pentateuch seems to be made up of pre-exist- 
 ing documents." 
 
 Ans. — It doubtless contains such but is not 
 made up of them. 
 (2). " The literary excellence of the work, too high 
 for the time of Moses." 
 Ans. 
 (a). Of this we are not fully qualified to judge. 
 
 Egypt the literary center of the world. 
 (b). But the kind of literary excellence shown falls 
 in with the theory of Mosaic authorship. It is 
 simple and majestic; not elaborate and ornate. 
 (3). " It lacks unity." 
 
 A)is. The more thoroughly the facts are examined 
 the less ground does there seem to be for this objec- 
 tion. 
 (4). " There are traces of an age later than Moses. 
 (a). In the use of certain proper names. Gen, 23:2, 
 compare with Josh. 14: 15, etc. Gen. 14:14com- 
 Josh. 19:47, etc. 
 
14 Syllabxis of Lectures. 
 
 (6). In certain historical and antiquarian allusions. 
 Gen. 12:6; Ex. 16: 36; Gen. 19:37; Deut. 3: 5, 
 9, 11; Gen. 36:31." 
 Ans. In some instances the facts have been imper- 
 fectly considered. {E. </., as to the names Hebron 
 and Dan ;) in others the explanation is apparent 
 (" unto this day "), and in others there may be 
 editorial observations inserted. 
 (5). " Indications that it was written in Palestine. The 
 term ' sea' is used for west:Gen. 12: 8; Ex. 26: 22, 
 and 'beyond Jordan' in the sense of 'east of Jor- 
 dan.' " Gen. 50: 11; Num. 22: 1. 
 
 Alls. These are apparent and not real. The term 
 for west doubtless originated in a maritime region. 
 " Beyond Jordan " is also used in the opposite 
 sense. 
 (6). " Such mention of Moses as he would not make. 
 He is spoken of in the third person, is strongly 
 commended (Num. 22: 3), and his death is narrated." 
 An'i. Of course there is, in this last, evidence of a 
 later hand, and possibly, also, in the passage in Num. 
 12:3. 
 (7). " The earlier portion of the Pentateuch has a 
 mythical and legendary aspect." 
 
 Ans. We should not be in haste to pronounce a 
 passage unhistorical without very convincing proof. 
 But this history is, in many ways, corroborated. 
 (8). " There are some moral and religious difficulties. 
 Sin had a mechanical origin; deception is approved; 
 no doctrine of immortality; religion a partial, out- 
 ward and selfish thing" 
 
 Ans. This objection jt?eryerte the history. 
 B. The Gospel. 
 I. The Problem. 
 
 1. As to subject-matter. 
 (1). Character of Christ. 
 
Syllabus of Lectures. 15 
 
 (2). Teachings of Christ. These are very radical 
 and original. 
 
 {a). Sets forth the essential rather than the acci- 
 dental. 
 
 {b). Pronounces blessing on sorrow. 
 
 (c). Gives the heart the first place. 
 
 {d). Golden rule. 
 
 (e). Lord'sprayer. 
 (3). Miracles of Christ. 
 
 [a). Considered as wonders. 
 
 (b). Considered as signs and revelations. 
 (4). History of Christ most unique. 
 (5). Circumstantiality of details. 
 
 2. As to form. 
 
 Two classes of phenomena, resemblances and 
 divergences. Tables have been constructed to 
 illustrate these. Those below are from Norton 
 and Westcott. 
 
 TABLE FIRST. 
 
 Let the contents of each book equal 100. Then 
 the peculiarities and concordances are: 
 
 Pecul. Con. 
 Mark. 7 93 = 100 
 
 John. 92 8 = 100 
 
 Matthew. 42 58 = 100 
 
 Luke. 59 41 = 100 
 
 TABLE SECOND — Concoi'dances. 
 
 Let all these be 100. Then there will be: 
 
 Common to Matt., Mnrk and Luke 53 
 
 Common to Matt, and Luke 21 
 
 Common to Matt, and Mark 20 
 
 Common to Mark and Luke 6 
 
 100 
 
16 Syllabus of Lectures. 
 
 TABLE THIRD. 
 
 Relation of General to Verbal Concordances: 
 Matt. 27 to 7, ^ of the latter being in the recitative 
 
 portions. 
 Mark 29 to 7, 4 of the latter being in the recitative 
 
 portions. 
 Luke 4 to 1, W being in the recitative portions. 
 
 II. The Solution. 
 
 1. Theories of unbelief. 
 (1). That of imposture. 
 
 (a). Entirely unsupported. 
 
 (6). Inadequate. Does not explain the phe- 
 nomena. 
 
 (c). History of the church refutes it. 
 (2). The mythical theory. 
 
 {a). Falls out with the style of the Gospels. 
 
 (^). Does not account for a suffering and crucified 
 Messiah. 
 
 (c). Nor for the existence of the church. 
 
 {d). Nor for the place of the Gospels in literature. 
 
 (e). Nor for the testimonies to Christ in general 
 history. 
 
 (/). Nor for the phenomena of the gospels as to 
 form. 
 
 (^). Finally, no time for the formation of myths. 
 
 2. Theories of faith. 
 
 (1). That of interdependence. 
 
 {ci). All possible arrangements of the synoptic 
 Gospels have been proposed. This shows that 
 no order of composition is clearly evident. 
 if)). And this does not account for independence 
 in language. 
 (2). That of a common written origin. 
 («.) No proof of such document. 
 (5). How could it have been lost? 
 
Syllahiis of Lectures. 17 
 
 (c). This inconsistent with the remarkable diversity 
 in language. 
 (3). A common oral source. 
 
 (a). Such an oral Gospel must have existed. 
 
 {b). This the common sense of the term Gospel in 
 
 the New Testament, 
 (c). This accounts for the phenomena: 
 [a). The resemblance 
 ip). And the diversity. 
 
 VI. 
 
 The CANOisr. 
 
 The term is derived from the Greek karoov — a straight 
 rod; hence a measuring rod; and then a standard, whether 
 in literature or religion. Iren^us, Bishop of Lyons 
 (2d century), was the first to use the term in this way. 
 A. The Canon of the Old Testament. 
 1. Basis, or test of canonicity. 
 Two theories. 
 (1). That the design was secular — to form a collec- 
 tion of national writings. 
 (2). That it was religious, books being admitted 
 because they were believed to be from God in 
 some special sense. 
 That the latter is historically correct is proved: 
 (a). By the Apochryphal books, which speak of 
 the books of the Old Testament as " holy books," 
 "dictated by God," etc., etc. 1 Mac. 2:9; 
 2 Mac. 6: 23, etc. 
 {b). Philo. refers to the canonical books as holy 
 and authoritative, but never does he so refer to 
 the Apochryphal books, 
 (c). Josephus speaks of these books as divine, and 
 says this " feeling is engendered in the mind of 
 
18 Sylh'lnis of Lectures. 
 
 every Jew from his earliest childhood." (Con- 
 tra Cepion, 1. 8). 
 {d). Christ charges the Pharisees with " teaching 
 for doctrines the commandments of men." 
 2. Contents of the Old Testament Canon. 
 
 (1). Book of Wisdom (B.C. 130), mentions "the 
 
 Law, the Prophets, and the rest of the books." 
 (2). Philo mentions the same three-fold classifica- 
 tion " laws, oracles spoken by the prophets, and 
 hymns and the others." 
 (3). Josephus says: "We have 22 books, namely, 
 five of the Law, thirteen of the Prophets, and four 
 of the Writings." As nearly the same enumeration 
 is found in certain later Jewish catalogues which 
 beyond question comprehend all the books of the 
 accepted canon, the belief is warranted that this 
 enumeration of Josephus comprehends the same. 
 Samuel, Kings, and Chronicles are each one book; 
 the twelve minor Prophets were counted as one; 
 Lamentations was counted with Jeremiah, and, 
 possibly, Nehemiah and Esther with Ezra. 
 [d). Christ, in Luke 21:44, mentions the same clas- 
 sification. 
 (e). Such Christian Fathers as Melito (2d century), 
 Origen (.Sd century) and Jerome (4th century), 
 give, substantially, our present list. 
 (/). The later Jewish authorities, the Talmud and 
 the Masoretes, bear witness to our present 
 accepted canon, 
 (r/). The quotations from the Old Testament into the 
 ^ the New Testament not only show that Christ 
 
 and his apostles used the books of the Old 
 Testament as authoritative and inspired; but, in 
 great measure, they serve to identify the books. 
 Their testimony is most important as to the 
 character and contents of the Old Testament 
 
Syllahus of Lectures. 1 9 
 
 Canon. Some of the signilicant facts of this 
 subject are: 
 
 (a). Whole number of quotations and allusions l/^ 
 more than 600. 
 
 (h). All the books of the Old Testament which, as 
 to their subject matter, are nearly akin to the 
 books of the New Testament, are quoted or t/* 
 alluded to. If any, such as Ecclesiastes or Can- 
 ticles, are not quoted, tlie reason is apparent in 
 the character of the book. 
 
 (c). The Apochryphal books are never thus quoted 
 or referred to. 
 
 {d.) The Pentateuch, Psalms, and Isaiah are most 
 abundantly quoted. As these fall into different 
 divisions of the old Testament, this fact indicates 
 that each of these divisions, the Law, the 
 Prophets and the Writings, was held to be alike 
 inspired, 
 
 [Note. — The source of confusion on this subject seems 
 to have been the use of the Septuagint version, in which 
 the Canonical and Apochryphal books were mingled with- 
 out distinction. Augustine (355-430), who was more of 
 a theologian than a scholar, seems to have been culpablv 
 loose in his treatment of these.) 
 
 B. The New Testament canon. 
 1. Tests by which made up. 
 
 (1). Apostolic authorship and authority. 
 
 (a). Direct. Two of the Gospels, all of the Epis- 
 tles and the Apocalypse. 
 ip). Indirect. Mark, Luke and Acts. Mark gives 
 the Petrine Gospel as Papias in the 2d century 
 records the tradition of the church to be. Luke 
 gives the Pauline Gospel, and, too, there seems 
 to be an indirect authoritative character in the 
 book of Acts. 
 
20 Syllabus of Lectures. 
 
 (2). Involved in this was insjDiration. 2 Peter 3:15, 
 16, proves that these books even then had come 
 up to the level of the Old Testament. Justin 
 Martyr (Apol. 1: 67) speaks of Christians as " be- 
 lieving on the voice of God addressed to them by 
 the Prophets and Apostles, whose writings are 
 read each Sunday in the public assembly," etc. 
 
 (3). In some cases the book itself seems to put forth 
 a claim to authorit3^ 
 
 Paul's epistles have an official character — " Paul 
 the Apostle." Sometimes he assumes the author- 
 ity of his own epistles — 2 Thess. 3: 14. The epis- 
 tles of James, Peter and Jude contain the same 
 implication of Apostolic character. 
 
 2. Contents. 
 
 These may be best considered under the two 
 heads given by Eusebius (A. D. 270-340), namely: 
 Homologoumena, or books universally acknowl- 
 edged, and Antilegomena, or books disputed. 
 
 (1). Homologoumena — Books acknowledged. These 
 are the Gospels, Acts, thirteen epistles of Paul 
 (Hebrews omitted), 1 John and 1 Peter. Touch- 
 ing no one of these has there ever been any mate- 
 rial difference of opinion. They have been ac- 
 cepted uniformly and unanimously by the general 
 church. 
 {a). First century witnesses. These are the Apos- 
 tolic Fathers and certain expressions which 
 occur in the canonical books themselves. 2 
 Peter 3: 15, 16, shows that the idea of the 
 canon, which was originally limited to the Old 
 Testament, had become extended so as to in- 
 clude other books. The evidence given by 
 the Apostolic Fathers is in the form of coinci- 
 dences in language and not formal quotations. 
 
Syllabus of Lectures. 21 
 
 There is nothing against any of these books 
 directly or by implication, by omission or 
 repudiation. 
 ih). Second century witnesses. 
 
 {a). Muratorian canon (cir. 160-170 A. D.). The 
 oldest list of New Testament books. It is 
 somewhat mutilated. There is no perfect 
 copy extant. It gives testimony to all these 
 books. Though Matthew and Mark are 
 wanting, yet Luke is called the third Gos- 
 pel and John the fourth. 
 
 (b). The Peshito — Syriac New Testament (2d 
 century). This version contains all these 
 books. 
 
 (c). The Old Italic Version (2d century) con- 
 tained all the Homologoumena. 
 
 [d). Justin Martyr (8. 165). He mentions the 
 Gospels, which he calls the "memoirs of the 
 Apostles," and shows acquaintance, by inci- 
 dental allusions, with all the books of the 
 New Testament except- Philemon, Titus, and 
 the Catholic epistles. Of course it is not to 
 be inferred that he did not know these. 
 
 {e). Papias (140-150), Bishop of Hierapolis, 
 speaks of two Gospels — "the first written 
 by Matthew," and the second, " according 
 to the elders, Mark wrote as he received 
 it from Peter." 
 
 (/). Irenreus, Bishop of Lyons (130-200). 
 
 He mentions the four gospels and ascribes 
 them to those whose names they bear. He 
 quotes, as Scripture., Acts, twelve epistles of 
 Paul (omittiiig Philemon), 1st Peter, 1st and 
 2d John and the Apocalypse. 
 
22 Syllahns of Lectures. 
 
 (g). Tertullian (150-220) refers to the four Gos- 
 pels, Acts, thirteen epistles of Paul, 1st 
 Peter, 1st John, Jude and the Apocalypse. 
 (A). Clement of Alexandria (165-220). He 
 quotes four Gospels, Acts, all Paul's epis- 
 tles except Philemon, 1st Peter, 1st John, 
 Jude, and the Apocalypse, 
 (c). Third century witnesses. 
 
 In this century we have several lists, two of 
 which seem intended to be complete. There 
 were about forty writers whose works are still 
 extant in whole or in part. Among these 
 were Cyprian, Dion^^esius, Origen, etc. The 
 sum of their testimony indicates practical una- 
 nimity as to this part of the canon. 
 (d). Fourth century witnesses. 
 
 There are about ten catalogues of this century, 
 and writers many and voluminous. Among 
 these are Arius, Athanasius, Jerome, Euse- 
 bius and Augustine. All agree on these 
 books. 
 2. The Antilegomena — Books disputed. 
 
 These are James, 2d Peter, 2d and 3d John, Jude 
 Hebrews and Revelations. Touching these it may 
 be observed — 
 (1). The doubts respecting them turned on their 
 
 genuineness. 
 (2). The evidence against them is mainly that of 
 
 omission; not of repudiation. 
 (3). Some more definite statements may help to indi- 
 cate more exactly the state of the question as to 
 particular books. 
 (a). The evidence for Hebrews is most nearly per- 
 fect. Out of twenty-eight lists preserved 
 from the early church, there are but two from 
 which it is certainly omitted. All the Con- 
 
Syllahus of Lectures. 
 
 %\ 
 
 ciliar and Oriental catalogues contain it. 
 Doubts seem to have been limited mainly to 
 the Western church; hence its place in our 
 Bible. 
 
 (//). The Apocalypse was latest in gaining an 
 assured place in the canon. But it stands in 
 a majority of the lists, and (which is especially 
 important in such a matter) in lists and litera- 
 ture representing every section of the church 
 — Palestine, Constantinople, Syria, Italy and 
 Spain. Among those who give evidence in 
 its favor are Justin Martyr, Irenteus, Clement 
 of Alexandria, Origen, Tertullian, Jerome, etc. 
 
 (c). The case is similar as to the smaller books. 
 Out of twenty-eight lists tabulated by West- 
 cott they appear in about twenty. There are 
 few expressions of doubt; the main evidence 
 against them is that of omission. 
 
 VII. 
 
 Thd Divine OriCtIN of the Bible. 
 
 Preliminary. 
 
 1. Three great issues between Naturalism and Super- 
 naturalism: 
 
 (a). As to the Divine Man— Jesus Christ. 
 
 (i). As to the Divine Book— the Bible. 
 
 (c). As to the Divine Work— spiritual character. 
 
 2. Things assumed in this inquiry, 
 (a). The genuineness of the Bible. 
 (/>). The authenticity of the Bible, 
 (c). The correctness of the Canon. 
 
 3. Elements to be eliminated from this inquiry. 
 
 All editorial and mechanical modifications subse- 
 quent to the completion of the several books. (See 
 lecture III.) 
 
24 SyllahMS of Lectures. 
 
 I. The idea of inspiration. 
 
 1. That the Bible contains God. 
 
 2. That the books of Scripture were originated under 
 an extraordinary influence of God's Spirit. 
 
 («). This to be distinguished from all forms of merely 
 human inspiration. 
 
 {b). From the common influence of the Spirit upon 
 all good men. 
 
 (c). And from its richer influence upon sacred exer- 
 cises and offices. 
 
 {d.) Best seen and understood in the inspiration which 
 came upon Prophets and Apostles. 
 
 II. The fact of inspiration. 
 
 1. The Subject of the Bible, the Lord Jesus Christ, is 
 divine. 
 
 {a). Shown by his relation to Old Testament Prophecy. 
 
 ip). By his strange and unique career. 
 
 (c.) By the unaccountable originality of his sayings. 
 
 {(l). By the perfection of his character. 
 
 (e). By his miracles. 
 
 [f). By his assumption of divine prerogatives. 
 
 2. Its influence is divine — supporting, elevating, sancti- 
 fying. 
 
 3. Its authors were inspired men. 
 («). Prophets. 
 
 ip). Apostles. 
 
 4. It exhibits such phenomena as might be looked for 
 in an inspired book. 
 
 {n). Supernatural revelations. 
 
 {b). Predictions of future events. 
 
 (c). Wondrous power of searching the heart. 
 
 5. Borne witness to by (Jhrist and His Apostles. Matt. 
 1:22,2:15,22:43; John]2:40; Acts 28: 25. 
 
 6. Definite claim of Scripture. 
 
 ( \ n 4. 1 ^ \ '"''The Scriptures." 
 
 («). By terms employed,-} aThe^„;yScriptares",etc. 
 
Syllabus of Lectures. 25 
 
 (b). As synonymous with its Divine Author. 
 Gen. 12:1-3 = Gal. 3:8. 
 Ex. 9: 16 = Rom. 9:17. 
 
 Psalms 95:7, 8, == Heb. 3:7. 
 (c). By direct assertion. 
 2 Tim. 3:16. 
 2 Peter 1:21. 
 2 Peter 3:16. 
 7. This the uniform Faith of Catholic Church, 
 See Westcott's Introduction to Gospels — Ap. B., 
 Or Lee on Inspiration — Ap. G. 
 
 Objections and difficulties. 
 
 1. Inspiration unnecessary to account for much of the 
 Bible. 
 
 Ans. 
 
 {a). Are we competent to decide this? 
 
 {b). May it not be necessary for the histories of 
 
 the Bible with their proper adjustment? 
 (c). Are not \hQ^Q fundamental f 
 (d). Opposed to explicit testimo7iy of Scripture. 
 
 2. ^^Many things too trivial.'''' 
 Ans. 
 
 (a). Things small or great because of their relations. 
 
 {b). If any human trait, why not these? 
 
 (c) Necessary that there be perfect humanness. 
 
 {d). These may be the^ne liiies of the p>e feet picture. 
 
 3. "7>^ some cases inspiration expressly disavowed , as in 
 1 Cor. 7:10, 12,25." 
 
 Ans. The reverse plainly true. Three cases: 
 {a). That in v. 10. Here the Lord had spoken. — 
 
 Mat. 19:5. 
 (5). That in v. 12 Paul reverses the old order, 
 (c). That ill V. 25 Paul expresses an opinion as to 
 
 expedie?icy. 
 
 4. " Some books mentioned in Bible are lost.''"' 
 
Syllabus of Lectures. 
 
 (1). Old Testament Books. 
 
 Book of Wars of Jehovah. Num, 21: 14. 
 Book of Jasher — 2 Sam. 1: 18; Josh. 10: 13. 
 Solomon's many books — 2 Chron. 35:25. 
 Book of Nathan and Gad — 2 Chron. 9: 29. 
 Book of Acts of Solomon — 1 Kings 11: 41. 
 Book of Chronicles and Kings — 2 Kings 24:5. 
 (2.) N'eio Testament Books. 
 
 Many lives of Christ — Luke 1: 1. 
 Epistle from Laodicea — Col, 4: 16. 
 A?is. 
 
 (a). Reason to think this last is " Ephesians." 
 
 (b). Even if we could know (as we do not) that 
 
 some of these lost books were inspired, it 
 
 would not follow that our present canon is 
 
 mutilated. T'o7\ 
 
 {a). Some prophets' mission to their own age 
 
 alone, 
 (b). Others, as Jonah, mainli/ so. 
 (c). Many of Christ's acts and words are lost. 
 {d). Hence this in harmony with history. 
 5. " SS. contain mistakes and errors.'''' 
 Ans. 
 
 {a). Not proved. 
 
 [b). May not be a fatal objection if proved. 
 II. Theories of Inspiration. 
 1. As to extent. 
 
 (1). Par^i'a/inspiration. 
 
 [a). Assumes unwarrantable distinction in Scrip- 
 ture. 
 {b). Does not truthfully reflect the general con- 
 sciousness of the Church on this subject, 
 (c). Takes away from the Bible its fitness as a rule 
 
 of faith. 
 {d). Opposed to plain affirmation of Scripture. 
 
SyllahuH of Lectures. 27 
 
 (2). The theory of def/rees of inspiration. 
 
 (a). (Jan there be degrees of inspiration? 
 
 (/>). No intimation of this in Bible itself. 
 
 (c). Still may help us to conceive of the way in 
 which books of Scripture were originated. 
 (3). Plenary inspiration. Two particulars. 
 
 {a). Whole Bible inspired. 
 
 (^). And equally inspired. 
 2. As to mode. 
 
 (1). Rationalistic theory. 
 
 (rt). ^o\>real inspiration. 
 
 (6). Stands opposed by divine phenomena. 
 
 (c). Destroys Bible as a book of religion. 
 (2). Mechanical theory. 
 
 (a). Does not account for human phenomena. 
 
 {b). Fatal to Bible as a book of reli(jio7i. 
 
 (c). Its affinities are Calmnistic. 
 (3). Dynam^ic theory. Writer dealt with not as a 
 forceless instrum,ent., but as a living agent. 
 
 (a). Explains human phenomena. 
 
 ip). And the divine phenomena. 
 
 (c). Makes it a book of religion. 
 
 {d). And Divine- Human like Christ. 
 
 PRESERVATION. 
 
 VIII. 
 
 The Bible Written — Scripture Manuscripts. 
 
 1. Materials. 
 
 (1). Dyed skins. (All synagogue robes.) 
 (2). Parchment. (Oldest extant MSS.) 
 (3). Cotton paper. (From 10th century.) 
 (4). Linen paper. (After 14th century.) 
 
28 Syllabus of Lectures, 
 
 2. Numbers. 
 
 (1). Of portions of Old Testament about 1400. 
 (2). Of portions of New Testament about 1600. 
 
 3. Age. 
 
 (1). Old Testament MSS. from 10th century to printing. 
 (2). New Testament MSS. from 4th century to printing. 
 
 4. Some of the Most Important. 
 
 (1). Codex Sinaiticus. (A,) 
 
 {a). Age — 4th century. 
 
 (b). Contents — All the New Testament, and much of 
 the Septuagint, etc. 
 
 (c). Character — excellent. 
 
 {(X), Kept in Royal Library of St. Petersburg. 
 
 (e) Published in fac sim,ile. 
 (2). (Jodex Yaticanus. (B.) 
 
 {a) Age — 4th century. 
 
 (b). Contents — Most of Septuagint and the New Tes- 
 tament. 
 
 (c). Character — Very excellent. 
 
 {d) History — Unknown. 
 
 (e). Kejyt in the Vatican Library. 
 
 (/"). Published in fac simile. 
 (3). Codex Alexandrinus. (A.) 
 
 [a). Age — 5th century. 
 
 {b). Contents — Septuagint and most of New Testa- 
 ment. 
 
 (c). History — Presented to Charles I by Cyril Lucas, 
 Patriarch of Alexandria. 
 
 {d). Kept in British Museum. 
 
 (e). Published m f(c si7nile. 
 
 IX. 
 Various Readings. 
 1. Their Number. 
 
 {a). Gross number in New Testament estimated at 
 120,000. 
 
Syllahufi of Lectures. 29 
 
 (6). No doubt ill more than a few hundred of places. 
 This includes all cases of order, inflection, 
 orthography, etc. 
 (c). Very few places in which the sense is affected. 
 {d). Still fewer are of any doctrinal importance. 
 'I. Classified as to their Orieiin. 
 
 (1). Accidental. The great majority are of this class. 
 Some sources of mistake were: 
 {a). Imperfect sight — Eg. Rom. 12:11 — Kaipcj — 
 
 KvpiGj. 
 (b). Imperfect hearing — E. g. " Itacisms." Rom. 
 
 2:17. 
 (c). Imperfect Ji^c?(/me/i?. 
 
 (a). Words wrongly divided —1 Cor. 15:10. 
 ih). Abbreviations mistaken — 1 Tim. 3: 10. 
 (c). Glosses taken in from margin — Matt. 0:13; 
 John 5:3,4. 
 (2). Intentional. 
 
 (Not always with corrupt motives.) 
 {a). To remove difficulties. 
 
 {a). Of language — Luke 1:04. 
 {b). Of history— Matt. 27:9; John 19: 14. 
 (c). Of geography — John 1:28. 
 {d). Of doctrine— Mark 13: 32. 
 {b). To improve the text. 
 
 [a). Classical for Hebraistic idiom. 
 
 {h). Fuller statement found in another place. 
 
 Acts 9: 5, 0. 
 (c). Liturgical additions. Matt. 0:13 — amen 
 added to some of the books. 
 3. Importance. 
 
 {a). Do not modify the doctrinal teaching of Scrip- 
 ture. 
 [b). Nor its characteristic and fundamental facts, 
 (c). Only affects the lights and shades of the picture^ 
 and the number of proof texts. 
 
30 Syllabus of Lectures. 
 
 4. Some of the Most Important Various Readings, 
 
 Matt. (3:13; 11:19; 19:17. Mark 1:2; 3:29; 16:9-20. 
 Luke2:14. John 1: 18; 5: 3-4; 7:53: 8:11. Acts 
 8:37; 9:5-0; 20:28. Rom. 5:1; 8:1. lTim.3:16. 
 1 John 2:23; 3:1; 5:7. 
 
 X. 
 
 History of the Printed Text. 
 
 I. Hebrew Old Testament. 
 
 1. First complete Hebrew Bible 1488. 
 
 2. Complutension Polyglot 1514. 
 
 3. Buxtorfs Hebrew Bible IGll. 
 
 4. Hebrew Bible of Joseph Athias 1661. 
 
 (a). This the basis of all subsequent editions. 
 
 (5). Van Der Hooght's edition of this text is the pres- 
 ent Textus Receptus of the Old Testament. 
 
 (c). Chief manual editions of this are Judah d'Alle- 
 
 mand's — London 1825. 
 
 Hahn's — Leipsic 1832. 
 
 Theile's— Leipsic 1834. 
 
 Letteris'— New York 1869. 
 
 I I. Greek New Testament. 
 
 1. Complutension 1514. 
 
 2. Erasmian New Testament 1516. 
 
 3. Stephens' New Testament 1551. 
 
 4. Elzevirs' New Testament 1624. 
 
 5. Mills' New Testament— Oxford 1707. 
 
 6. Grissbach's— Halle 1775-1806. 
 
 7. Lachman's— Berlin 1831-1850. 
 
 8. Tischendorp's— Leipsic 1840-1869. 
 
 9. Tregelles' 1844-1872. 
 
 10. Westcott & Hort's 1882. 
 
 III. Sonne Leading Versions. {First Editions.) 
 
 Septuagint 1514. 
 
 Syriac New Testament 1552. 
 
Syllabus of Lectures. 81 
 
 TargLims 1482. 
 
 Vulgate 1452. 
 
 German 1462. 
 
 Italian 1471. 
 
 French 1487. 
 
 Spanish 1543. 
 
 Danish 1524. 
 
 English 1525. 
 
 XI. 
 
 Most Important Ancient Verses. 
 
 1. Septuagint. 
 
 — Hebrew Old Testament into Greek. Made by- 
 Alexandrian Jews about 285 B. C. 
 — In common use in Christ's time. 
 — Work of unequal merit. Pentateuch excellent. 
 
 2. Targiwis. 
 
 — Old Testament into Aramaean (Chaldee). This had 
 
 come to be the Jews' language. 
 — Age. Oldest extant %oritte7i Targums do not go 
 
 beyond 1st century A. I). 
 — Targum of Onkelas most important. 
 
 3. Syriac. 
 
 — Whole Bible into Western Aramaean (Syriac). 
 — Date — Probably 2d century A. D. 
 — Syriac the birth-language of Xy. 
 
 — This version excellent — very literal and of high 
 authority. 
 
 4. Vulgate. 
 
 — Whole Bible into Latin. 
 ■ — The first " Italic " version was made from the Septua- 
 gint — 2d century A. D. 
 
 — This was revised by Jerome 384-404. 
 
 — Jerome also executed an independent version which 
 came to be to some extent blended with this. 
 
Syllabus of Lectures. 
 
 — Hence Vulgate a composite of 
 {a). "Old Italic." 
 {b). Revised Italic. 
 (c). Jerome's Version. 
 
 XII. 
 English Versions of the Bible. 
 
 1. Wyclif 's— 1380 and 1388. New Testament and 
 part of Old Testament. 
 
 — From the Vulgate. 
 
 — Revised in 1382 by Nicholas Hereford; and in 
 1388 by John Purvey, who had been Wyclif 's 
 curate. More than four-fifths of Wyclif 's Bibles 
 now extant are of this latter revision. 
 
 — Some noticeable facts — 
 
 [a). Made from Vulgate, and not the original. 
 (c). Only English Bible for nearly 150 years. 
 {b). Popular rather than ecclesiastical. 
 
 2. Tyndales — 1525-1535 — New Testament and part of 
 Old Testament. 
 
 («). First English Bible translated from the original. 
 
 {b). First printed English Bible. 
 
 (c). Possessed of marked excellences: 
 
 ici). Critical scholarship. 
 
 ip). Felicities of expression. 
 
 (c). Practical sagacity and popular adaptation. 
 {d). This version the basis of all subsequent English 
 versions. 
 
 3. Coverdale's— 1535— Whole Bible. 
 
 A revision of Tyndale's from the Vulgate and I^uther's 
 
 German Bible. 
 
 It was a compromise Bible. 
 
 4. Matthew's Bible— 1537. 
 
 {a). Some have thought " Thomas Matthew " to be a 
 pseudonym for John Rogers, whose initials are 
 attached to the preface. Of this there is no proof. 
 
Syllabus of Lectures. 33 
 
 It maybe that this unknown " Thomas Matthew,'* 
 was a patron of the enterprise. 
 {h). This was the first authorized English Bible. 
 
 5. The great Bible— 1539-1540. 
 
 (a). Sometime called Cranmer's, but incorrectly. 
 {b). Formally attacked by the inquisition. 
 
 (c). Source of most of the Scriptures in the book of 
 common prayer. 
 
 6. Geneva Bible — New Testament, 1557. Whole Bible, 
 1560. 
 
 {a). First English Bible printed in Roman letters. 
 
 {b). First to avow the principle of Italic words, 
 
 (c). First to use the verse division. 
 
 {d). First to omit the Apochrypha. 
 
 {e). Specially suited for family and private study. 
 
 (,/). Some attention given to the original text. 
 
 {g). Very popular — 90 editions before present author- 
 ized version. 
 
 {h). Contained helpful explanatory notes. (Some- 
 times known as the " Breeches Bible.") 
 
 7. Bishops' Bible— 1568-1572. 
 Basis of King James' version. 
 
 8. Rheims and Douay. (Catholic version). 
 («). New Testament at Rheims in 1582. 
 (^>). Old Testament at Douay in 1609. 
 
 9. King James' authorized version. 
 
 {a). History. '54 translators selected: 47 actually 
 employed. Work began in 1607; Bible pub- 
 lished in 1611. 
 (J). General character — most excellent. 
 
 This the agreeing opinion of critics of all classes 
 of belief, 
 (c). Borne defects. 
 
 (1). Based on an inferior text. 
 
 (2). Contains some/aults of translatio7i. 
 
34 Syllabus of Lecture 
 
 (a). Distinctions created. 
 
 i cannot. 
 Rom. 4th chapter, Xoyi Lojxai \ reckon. 
 
 ( compute. 
 1 Cor. 3: 17. 
 Phil. 2:13, etc., etc. 
 {b). Distinctions obliterated. 
 
 {a). ady?-y£€vva = " Hell." 
 
 zoov-dvpiov = " Beast." 
 
 SiaSoXOi-daipiGDv r= " Devil." 
 (c). Inconsistencies in proper names, 
 (d). Improper treatment of names of Deity. 
 (e). Some errors in Syyitax. 
 (f). Some errors in Lexicography. 
 
 Gen. 6;3; Job 19: 23-26; Psalms 49:14. 
 Acts 17:22, 23; 1 Cor. 13: 12, etc., etc. 
 
 XIII. 
 
 Genuineness. 
 Defined. The relation of a book to its author. It 
 involves two elements: 
 (1). That the claims of a book, as to its author, are 
 
 true; whether it be 
 
 (a). Anonymous, e. g., many Biblical books. 
 
 (b). Or by an author who uses a 7iom de plume^ 
 as Diedrich Knickerbocker's New York. 
 
 (c). Or in his proper name. 
 (2). That it has been uncorruptedly preserved. 
 Distinguished from authenticity. 
 
 — Genuineness is the relation of a book to its author, 
 and so is opposed to all forms of illegtimacy. 
 
 — Authenticity is the relation between a document 
 and the matters of fact which it purports to repre- 
 sent. Its more common name is trustworthiness. 
 It is based on the competency and honesty of tlie 
 writer. 
 
fSyllabus of Lecttires. 35 
 
 3. Proofs of genuineness. 
 
 r Hebrew, Old Testament, 1488. 
 (1). Printed books, \ Greek, New Testament. 1514. 
 
 ( Vulgate, 1452. 
 (2). Manuscripts, f Jews and Samaritans. 
 
 (3.) Versions, Pharis's & Sadducees. 
 
 (4). Quotations and allusions, J Jews and Christians. 
 (5). Relations of parties, j East'n & West'n Ch. 
 
 I Catholic & Protestant. 
 1^ Protestant sects. 
 
 XIV. 
 Authenticity of the Bible. 
 
 Shown by 
 
 1. Its harmony with itself, 
 (a). As to general plan, 
 (b). As to doctrine. 
 
 (c). As to facts of history, 
 (d). As to sjnrit and tone. 
 
 2. With the jyhysical conditions of its assumed origin, 
 (a). The land with its climate, fau?ia, flora, etc., etc. 
 (6.). The people; their domestic, civil, religions life. 
 
 3. With prof ane history. 
 Some special issues. 
 
 [a). Use of the grape and wine in Egypt. 
 {b). Acts 13:7. 
 
 (c). Hamitic character of Babylonish Kingdom. 
 {d). Life of Christ. 
 
 4. With latest historical researches, 
 [a). At Jerusalem. 
 
 (b). At JSFineveh. 
 
 (c). In Palestine in general. 
 
 (d). In Moab. 
 
 5. With existing i^istitutions. 
 {a). The Sabbath. 
 
 {b). The Lord's Supper, 
 (c). Baptism. 
 
Syllabus of Lectwf 
 
 3») Bvllahus of Lectures. 
 
 6. Of its facts icith its doctrines, 
 [a). As to Jesns C/irist. 
 (b). As to spirituaJ character. 
 (c). Moral precepts in general. 
 
 INTERPRETATION 
 
 XV. 
 
 Sacred Hermeneutics. 
 1. Defined. — Tlie Science of biblical Interpretation . Its 
 province is to set forth its principles and Jaios. It 
 differs from exegesis as the irhole from a part. 
 General Principles. 
 
 (1). With certain qualifications the Bible must be 
 interpreted like any other book. These qualifica- 
 tions arise — 
 (a). From its composite character. 
 {b). Its spiritual character. 
 
 (c). Its divinity and hence its exhcnistless fulness, 
 (d). The typical and prophetical element. 
 {a). Events seen in perspective. 
 (b). Double fulfillment. 
 
 (c). Sometimes an ideal standpoint as to time. 
 — This principle sweeps away dangerous errors. 
 {a). The Papistical Theory — certain men insp>ired 
 
 to interpret. 
 {b). The Fanatical Theory — Holy Spirit only and 
 
 sufficient guide, 
 (e). The Allegorical Theory — Hidden and mystical 
 sense. 
 
Syllabus of Lectures. •i7 
 
 (2). The Interpreter must recognize the essential unity 
 of Script ureit. This unity is involved in its divine 
 authorship. 
 
 (3). And the purpose of the Bible — a book of Salva- 
 tion. 
 
 (4). He must bring to his work suitable quali/lcatio/is. 
 (a). Moral and spiritual. 
 
 (a). Cordial sympathy with S2yiritual truth, 
 (b). Freedom {rom prejudice. 
 
 (c). Singleness of desire to know the mind of 
 God. 
 
 {b). Literary. 
 
 {a). Good general education, 
 (b). Knowledge of sacred languages, 
 (c). And of sacred a^'chmology. 
 
 (d). Acquaintance with man, especially on his relig- 
 ious side, 
 (e). And with the history of interpretation. 
 3. Rules of interpretation. 
 
 (1). Interpret philologicaUy: that is according to the 
 general laws of language. 
 {a). As to words. 
 
 {a). The etymological sense. 
 (5). The usage, 
 (b). As to construction. 
 
 Acts 2:47. Attention to the tense removes a 
 difficulty. 
 
 John 13: 2 — " Supper transpiring." 
 (c). As to minuter details. 
 
 1st Peter 1: 1 — The order of the countries indi- 
 cates Peter to have been in Babylon and not 
 Rome. 
 
 Mark 6: 39 — "Upon the gree/t grass." 
 Mark 15:21 — "Coming from the field." 
 
38 Syllahvs of Lectures. 
 
 (2). Interpret historically. 
 
 (Luke 19: 41 — " When he was come near he beheld 
 the city." — There is a point in this journey where 
 " the city " bursts suddenly and impressively upon 
 the sight. 
 
 Luke 13: 28; Luke 8:23; Mark 14: 2G; Prov. 25: 13; 
 Mat. 5 : 14, etc. 
 (3). Interpret consistently. 
 
 V Gal. 1:23. 
 [a). Immediate con- J Rom. 3:3. Heb. 11:1. 
 
 text— ^. (/. Faith, 1 Acts. 17: 31. Rom. 3: 28. 
 
 [ Rom. 14: 23. 
 ip). General scope — Rom. 4:5. 
 (c). Position of writer — Job 17:26. 
 (d). General teaching of ss. — " analogy of faith." 
 {a). Yerhal parallels. 
 ip). Meal parallels. 
 (4). Interpret sjm'Uiially. 
 (a). Manifest aim — John 5: 39; Rom. 15:4. 
 [b). Illustrations in New Testament. Mat. 2: 15, 23. 
 (c). Bible should be treated as nature. Its office is 
 to reveal God. 
 
 WORKING ORDER FOR 1882-3. 
 
 1. What claims has the Bible upon our attention and 
 study ? 
 
 2. What is the Bible? 
 
 3. Is the Bible genuine? 
 
 4. Is the Bible true? 
 
 5. Is the Bible inspired? 
 
 6. How should the Bible be interpreted and used? 
 
PAMPHLET BINDER 
 
 Syracuse, N. V. 
 
 ■ Stockton, Calif. 
 
BS591 .H48 
 
 Biblical introduction : syllabus of 
 
 .MM."M.f,?,?.I!!'^°l?.^'*^^' Seminary-Speer Library 
 
 m 
 
 012 00043 7600